3 ms·

In what way is it sexist - because the woman wears a mini skirt? Because it is suggested that it is worthwhile to attract women? Because the guy doesn't wear a

In what way is it sexist - because the woman wears a mini skirt? Because it is suggested that it is worthwhile to attract women? Because the guy doesn't wear a mini skirt - and she likes him for his salary, not his looks? Because the ad doesn't mention her PhD in mathematics? I think this is all blown very much out of proportions. Sexual attraction is a basic aspect of human life.

JoeAltmaier 13y ago
Imagine if she had been the programmer, and he the boy-toy. Would have looked weird. That's how it looks to the ladies. And that's called 'sexist'.
- knowitall 13y ago
  No it wouldn't have looked weird. That is just the typically baseless claim feminists insert into their arguments. There are lots of ads that claim product x makes women more attractive to men. I could agree that it would have looked weird in the sense that most ads look weird. Most ads are completely ridiculous. To get worked up about them is somewhat useless. Their weirdness is also probably a function of their shortness, though.
  - JoeAltmaier 13y ago
    Doesn't look weird to you ... who are what? A female programmer tired of endless stereotypes in ads? Or a male who is tired of worrying about sexism and wants the discussion to go away?
    - knowitall 13y ago
      So my vote doesn't count? What qualifies you make such a general claim? I believe you that it bothers some people (for whatever reason - too much feminist indoctrination might play a part in some people). However, I don't think we can or should eliminate everything that bothers anybody from society, and reduce public life to the lowest common denominator.
      - JoeAltmaier 13y ago
        A definition of sexism : "behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex" Is there a stereotype that women are the toy/reward for a man doing a good job? Then that picture conforms to the definition of sexism given above. Its not about voting or your view vs mine or feminism. Its about statistics and trends. I don't know anything about common denominators, but if there is a trend toward reducing women in print media to objects, then it's worth trying to counter that trend somehow. I look forward to the day that nobody thinks twice about silly pictures, because they are set in a balanced culture of healthy representations in the media, fair hiring and reward based on skills. Are we there? I'd rather ask a woman trying to get ahead in business, than a guy tired of the discussion. In fact I don't think the average guy knows squat about where we are in this cultural evolution, as comments above make quite clear.
        knowitall 13y ago
        "A definition of sexism : "behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex"" That's just plain silly. So anything that suggests any gender in a person is sexism? Good luck with that. "Is there a stereotype that women are the toy/reward for a man doing a good job?" Women liking a man in general is something men want, likewise vice versa men liking a women is something women want. Therefore both things are being used in advertising. If an ad is targeted at men it will often show women liking the man, if an ad is tarted at women it will show men liking a woman. Do you believe there have never been any ads showing how a man falls for a woman? Do you believe it is sexist to assume men like being liked by women and vice versa? Do you believe in general wanting to impress the opposite sex is negligible as a motivational factor in people wanting to do a good job? Women in print media are necessarily objects - they are blots of ink printed on a 2d page. The "women as objects" discussion also needs to be questioned. What does it even mean? Men shouldn't be allowed to be attracted to the female physique? Before having sex, they should require women to pass an IQ test and recite the names of all American presidents? Funny enough the other day there was a post about a guy complaining about guys hooting for Marie Curie. Unless he thinks they were into her grey hair, apparently being attracted to brains also is not OK. I suppose wanting sex in general is not OK because it objectifies people. "In fact I don't think the average guy knows squat about where we are in this cultural evolution" I believe you don't really understand what is going on. You and the feminists are actually fighting to rob women of their privileges. Good job! (Hint: children)
moron4hire 13y ago
It's the implication that the woman is employed by the company to "welcome back" the programmer man, with a further implication that the "welcome" is sexual in nature. She is essentially cast as a prostitute. Specifically, NOT a programmer as well.
- knowitall 13y ago
  How is it implied that she is not a programmer? I didn't see that at all. Also I didn't see that she is employed to "welcome men" in the ad. That is just feminist glasses making you see things like that. She could just be working there and be happy to get another capable colleague.
  - varjag 13y ago
    > How is it implied that she is not a programmer? It's in the text. "More programmers to care for". The programmer in the text is male, not gender neutral. The picture shows a model performing intimate function (most would consider a hug and a touch on the chest intimate) on a male doing white-collar work. Unless you are specifically set on splitting hairs, there isn't much to argue about here.
    - knowitall 13y ago
      Huh? I'm not a native speaker, but I think "programmers" is a gender neutral expression. No doubt the ad is targeted at men, but that alone doesn't make it sexist.
      - varjag 13y ago
        1. It can be inferred the photo illustrates "caring" for programmers, as accompanying text suggests. 2. The programmer mentioned in the text is male (mentioned once by name and then as "He is seen here welcomed back"). Welcoming back obviously consists of caressing his body, which supports point 1. Now I make no statements about cultural circumstances, tradition, the zeitgeist of the 60s and so on. Just that sexism is objective concept denoting unequal treatment of genders, and this photo is steretoypically sexist; so much in fact that it's hopeless to even play No True Scotsman here.

JoeAltmaier 13y ago

Imagine if she had been the programmer, and he the boy-toy. Would have looked weird. That's how it looks to the ladies. And that's called 'sexist'.

knowitall 13y ago
No it wouldn't have looked weird. That is just the typically baseless claim feminists insert into their arguments. There are lots of ads that claim product x makes women more attractive to men. I could agree that it would have looked weird in the sense that most ads look weird. Most ads are completely ridiculous. To get worked up about them is somewhat useless. Their weirdness is also probably a function of their shortness, though.
- JoeAltmaier 13y ago
  Doesn't look weird to you ... who are what? A female programmer tired of endless stereotypes in ads? Or a male who is tired of worrying about sexism and wants the discussion to go away?
  - knowitall 13y ago
    So my vote doesn't count? What qualifies you make such a general claim? I believe you that it bothers some people (for whatever reason - too much feminist indoctrination might play a part in some people). However, I don't think we can or should eliminate everything that bothers anybody from society, and reduce public life to the lowest common denominator.
    - JoeAltmaier 13y ago
      A definition of sexism : "behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex" Is there a stereotype that women are the toy/reward for a man doing a good job? Then that picture conforms to the definition of sexism given above. Its not about voting or your view vs mine or feminism. Its about statistics and trends. I don't know anything about common denominators, but if there is a trend toward reducing women in print media to objects, then it's worth trying to counter that trend somehow. I look forward to the day that nobody thinks twice about silly pictures, because they are set in a balanced culture of healthy representations in the media, fair hiring and reward based on skills. Are we there? I'd rather ask a woman trying to get ahead in business, than a guy tired of the discussion. In fact I don't think the average guy knows squat about where we are in this cultural evolution, as comments above make quite clear.
      - knowitall 13y ago
        "A definition of sexism : "behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex"" That's just plain silly. So anything that suggests any gender in a person is sexism? Good luck with that. "Is there a stereotype that women are the toy/reward for a man doing a good job?" Women liking a man in general is something men want, likewise vice versa men liking a women is something women want. Therefore both things are being used in advertising. If an ad is targeted at men it will often show women liking the man, if an ad is tarted at women it will show men liking a woman. Do you believe there have never been any ads showing how a man falls for a woman? Do you believe it is sexist to assume men like being liked by women and vice versa? Do you believe in general wanting to impress the opposite sex is negligible as a motivational factor in people wanting to do a good job? Women in print media are necessarily objects - they are blots of ink printed on a 2d page. The "women as objects" discussion also needs to be questioned. What does it even mean? Men shouldn't be allowed to be attracted to the female physique? Before having sex, they should require women to pass an IQ test and recite the names of all American presidents? Funny enough the other day there was a post about a guy complaining about guys hooting for Marie Curie. Unless he thinks they were into her grey hair, apparently being attracted to brains also is not OK. I suppose wanting sex in general is not OK because it objectifies people. "In fact I don't think the average guy knows squat about where we are in this cultural evolution" I believe you don't really understand what is going on. You and the feminists are actually fighting to rob women of their privileges. Good job! (Hint: children)

moron4hire 13y ago

It's the implication that the woman is employed by the company to "welcome back" the programmer man, with a further implication that the "welcome" is sexual in nature. She is essentially cast as a prostitute. Specifically, NOT a programmer as well.

knowitall 13y ago
How is it implied that she is not a programmer? I didn't see that at all. Also I didn't see that she is employed to "welcome men" in the ad. That is just feminist glasses making you see things like that. She could just be working there and be happy to get another capable colleague.
- varjag 13y ago
  > How is it implied that she is not a programmer? It's in the text. "More programmers to care for". The programmer in the text is male, not gender neutral. The picture shows a model performing intimate function (most would consider a hug and a touch on the chest intimate) on a male doing white-collar work. Unless you are specifically set on splitting hairs, there isn't much to argue about here.
  - knowitall 13y ago
    Huh? I'm not a native speaker, but I think "programmers" is a gender neutral expression. No doubt the ad is targeted at men, but that alone doesn't make it sexist.
    - varjag 13y ago
      1. It can be inferred the photo illustrates "caring" for programmers, as accompanying text suggests. 2. The programmer mentioned in the text is male (mentioned once by name and then as "He is seen here welcomed back"). Welcoming back obviously consists of caressing his body, which supports point 1. Now I make no statements about cultural circumstances, tradition, the zeitgeist of the 60s and so on. Just that sexism is objective concept denoting unequal treatment of genders, and this photo is steretoypically sexist; so much in fact that it's hopeless to even play No True Scotsman here.